Legal Opinion

Hamrah v. Hamrah

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided January 11, 1977No. 19104PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

On our own motion, we raise the jurisdictional question that the transcript was not filed within the sixty days required by Tex. R.Civ.P. 386. This question arises from the circumstance that the judge signed a draft of judgment on May 6, 1976, and then signed another on June 30,1976, designated “nunc pro tunc.” Appellant appeals from the second judgment, and his transcript was not timely if his time began running from the original judgment. We hold that we have no jurisdiction because the second judgment made no material change in the original judgment and, therefore, did not affect the time…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. International Security Life Insurance Co. v. SprayTexas Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Blackman v. Housing Authority of City of DallasTexas Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Talmadge Tinsley Co., Inc. v. KerrCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1976
  4. Alamo Federal Credit Union v. CeledonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1967
  5. Gallagher v. SchlundtCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1970

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Ferguson v. Naylor, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1993
  2. Wuagneux Builders, Inc. v. Candlewood Builders, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1983
  3. General Motors Corp. v. Ramsey, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)1982
  4. Garza v. Serrato, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1984
  5. Gonzales v. RickmanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1988

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API